Bridge would not solve traffic problem The guest commentary advocating the Regents Road bridge made a few points, but not enough to justify what a proposed bridge will cost in terms of money and increased traffic jams in new areas. Another ingress/egress route between north and south University City sounds like it could theoretically be helpful. A bridge on 40-year-old master plans for Regents Road seemed like a solution, but it wouldn’t alleviate complaints of gridlocked residents living east of Genesee, which will persist after an expensive bridge is built. Regents Road would now empty northbound contents into Genesee east of Interstate 5, adding to congestion. Southbound traffic on Regents Road would head for either Route 52 or Governor, creating previously unprecedented and intensified traffic in a residential area that was once quiet. Neither direction of traffic at any time of the day will aid impacted east UC residents, some of whom are the most vocal bridge supporters. Traffic associated with three schools immediately surrounding the Genesee/Governor area, (Standley Middle, Curie Elementary and UCHS) won’t be lessened by this alleged bridge “panacea.” A new bridge’s existence won’t influence nor direct traffic to or away from this triangular school zone, a congested area twice daily during the school year. Congestion that occurs between Genesee, Governor, Nobel and I-805 won’t be abated. The bridge once again is pointed in the wrong direction to ease gridlock in east UC neighborhoods. Gridlock shall continue, according to city planners with no “axe to grind.” However, this $34 million plus environmental impact report (EIR) study and construction project will succeed in making a reasonably quiet neighborhood around Regents Road and Governor Drive as busy as the Genesee/Governor road currently is. FBA funds considered for the bridge could be applied to other projects which the entire community could support. When one considers what a bridge would do to environmental concerns and the creation of traffic snarls where they presently do not exist, spending money on this bridge is unjustified. As for proposed trolley lines linking up in north or south UC, your author obviously doesn’t ride in existing trolleys. These are virtually empty. A romance between Californians and their cars on glutted highways is not cooling off with the prospect of trolleys. Will a Regents Road bridge help? A little. However, its cost prevents other projects, which the community agrees on, from being started. An expenditure of this magnitude will not benefit enough UC residents to justify an EIR or starting construction on it. – Dr. Ernie Lippe, University City Obsolete project The Regents Road bridge is an obsolete project which would provide poor congestion relief for Genesee Avenue, would draw freeway trips from Interstate 5 through the University City community and would cause irreparable harm to Rose Canyon Park, one of the only public parks remaining in the area. The project was included, along with the Genesee Avenue widening, in the 1987 University Community Plan. At that time, the city projected that by 2005 there would be 70,000 average daily trips (ADT) on Genesee Avenue through south University City. In 2006, the measured traffic volume was below 34,000 ADT. The projections were off by more than 100 percent. The most recent projections, from the 2004 EIR, are for 42,000 ADT by year 2030. But records from the city’s own machine count tables show that Genesee Avenue traffic has hardly changed for decades and is now at its lowest level (28,700 ADT) in 23 years. Nevertheless, Genesee, like many roads, does experience some peak- hour congestion. The sources are the big trip generators in north UC: the Executive Office area, UTC, Costa Verde, etc. All these lie on or east of Genesee, and the demand is for trips to and from the South/Southeast. (La Jolla Village Square has immediate access to I-5.) This is why numerous traffic studies, dating back to 1994, have shown the Regents Road bridge to be a poor congestion reliever for Genesee. The Genesee Avenue widening project, on the other hand, would provide the capacity where it is needed: on Genesee. (It is also about $10 million less costly.) The EIR’s traffic study found that relevant segment levels of service on Genesee would be D, E and F (with E and F deemed “unacceptable”) with the bridge, while the widening would result in service levels all C. As for the crucial Genesee Ave./Governor Drive intersection, the study found it to be a toss-up, with the bridge doing better during a.m. peak and the widening better during p.m. peak. Unsurprisingly, the study found that the best way to clear this intersection would be to create an underpass there, since the overwhelming preponderance of peak hour traffic (80 percent during a.m., 70 percent during p.m.) proceeds straight through. Genesee is congested because it is used as an alternate to the chronically-congested Interstate 805 (northbound during a.m., southbound during p.m.). The best medicine for Genesee will be the planned widening of I-805. The most pressing needs in the area at the moment are for neither the bridge nor the widening, but rather for additional fire stations, and for improving flow and access at the Genesee / I-5 interchange. The bridge is a costly boondoggle that is, appropriately, now being priced out of existence. – Daniel Arovas, University City